Church Fathers Commentary Matthew 22:41-46

"Now while the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them a question, saying, What think ye of the Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, [The son] of David. He saith unto them, How then doth David in the Spirit call him Lord, saying, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, Till I put thine enemies underneath thy feet? If David then calleth him Lord, how is he his son? And no one was able to answer him a word, neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions." — Matthew 22:41-46 (ASV)

Pseudo-Chrysostom: The Jews tempted Christ, supposing Him to be a mere man; if they had believed Him to be the Son of God, they would not have tempted Him. Christ, therefore, willing to show that He knew the treachery of their hearts and that He was God, would not declare this truth to them plainly, so they could not use it as an occasion to charge Him with blasphemy. Yet, He would not conceal this truth completely, because He had come for the very purpose of preaching the truth.

He therefore asks them a question that would declare to them who He was: What do you think of the Christ? Whose Son is He?

St. John Chrysostom: He first asked His disciples what others said about Christ, and then what they themselves said, but He did not do so with these men. For they would have said that He was a deceiver and a wicked person. They thought that the Christ was to be a mere man, and therefore they say to Him, The Son of David. To reprove this, He brings forward the Prophet, who witnesses to His dominion, His proper Sonship, and His shared honor with the Father.¹

St. Jerome: This passage is from Psalm 109. Christ is therefore called David's Lord, not because of His descent from him, but because of His eternal generation from the Father, in which He existed before His earthly father. And David calls Him Lord, not by mere chance or his own idea, but by the Holy Spirit.

Remigius of Auxerre: When it says, Sit thou on my right hand, this is not to be taken as though God has a body, with either a right hand or a left hand. Rather, to sit at the right hand of God is to remain in the honor and equality of the Father's majesty.

Pseudo-Chrysostom: I suppose that He formed this question not only against the Pharisees but also against the heretics, for according to the flesh He was truly David's Son, but his Lord according to His divinity.

St. John Chrysostom: But He does not stop with this. So that they might be afraid, He adds, Till I make thine enemies thy footstool, hoping that at least through fear He might win them over.

Origen of Alexandria: For God places Christ's enemies as a footstool beneath His feet, for their salvation as well as their destruction.

Remigius of Auxerre: But "until" is used here for an indefinite time, so that the meaning is, "Sit forever, and forever hold your enemies beneath your feet."

Glossa Ordinaria: That the enemies are put under the Son by the Father does not denote the Son's weakness, but the union of His nature with the Father's. For the Son also puts the Father's enemies under Him when He glorifies His name on earth. He concludes from this authority, If David then call Him Lord, how is He his son?²

St. Jerome: This question is still useful for us against the Jews, for those who believe that the Christ is yet to come assert that He is a mere man—though a holy one—from the line of David. Let us, then, taught by the Lord, ask them: If He is a mere man and only the Son of David, how does David call Him his Lord?

To evade the truth of this question, the Jews invent many frivolous answers. They allege that this Psalm was composed from the perspective of Abraham's steward (whose son was Eliezer of Damascus), when after the overthrow of the five kings, the Lord God said to his lord Abraham, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool.

Let us ask how Abraham could say the things that follow, and compel them to tell us how Abraham was born before Lucifer, and how he was a Priest after the order of Melchizedek, for whom Melchizedek brought bread and wine, and from whom Abraham received a tenth of the spoils.

St. John Chrysostom: He put this conclusion to their questioning as a final and sufficient answer to silence them. From that point on, they held their peace—not by their own goodwill, but because they had nothing to say.

Origen of Alexandria: For if their question had sprung from a desire to know, He would never have proposed to them such things as would have deterred them from asking further.

Rabanus Maurus: From this we learn that the poison of jealousy can be overcome, but can hardly ever, on its own, be at peace.

1. Hom. lxxi
2. ap. Anselm